Cause it doesnt matter as long as ur camera is not vintage old. For good impressions you can always go boy broken 1DX or Hasselblad props. Just say its your "2nd body just in case"

Quote

I am one of those people who has to be one of the first to buy a new product. My rebel still works well. I just wanted to upgrade and introduce myself to the world of full frame. No regrets. I could never have waited until summer. Just a sickness I have.

Its not a sickness, you are just too fearful that you will miss something if u buy late

I don't want anyone to think I am a fanboy - but I don't think the 5D Miii is way overpriced.

When I first started shooting digital circa 2000, making the shift from film, I switched from Nikon 35mm to canon 10D. Since the, I have been tied to the system I had decided was best at the time. Each camera from that time has offered excellent image quality and features, all on par or in some cases better than Nikon.

Fast forward to 2012, and I was an early adopter of the 5D miii. Knowing full well that the price would drop, I took the risk to get a camera that on paper boasted all of the features I was looking for. I have not regretted my decision one bit. The camera is astonishingly good, allowing me to shoot in situations that were impossible with previous cameras.

Is the price high? Yes. But it is worth every penny. I have the 5D Mii, which I thought was really great when I bought it. The Miii is leaps and bounds better. Even the build feels more solid.

Innovation and higher standards cost more money. And other than the 1DX, this is the best camera Canon has ever offered and at half the price of the flagship model.

Is it better than the Nikon D800? I honestly don't know - and don't care. I have too many lenses and flashes to even think about switching systems. As someone else stated earlier - if you can't afford it - then it is not the right camera for you. Be happy with what you have and create the best work you can.

In the end, no one cares if you shot a master work with a Rebel or a D800 or 1DX. Other than fellow photographers, no one has ever asked me what camera I shot a great photo with.

digital cameras are not investments and that if you were a business owning them then you would be writing off a sizeable fraction of the capital cost each year due to this.

From About.com

"Double Declining Balance DepreciationThe double declining balance depreciation method is like the straight-line method on steroids. To use it, accountants first calculate depreciation as if they were using the straight line method. They then figure out the total percentage of the asset that is depreciated the first year and double it. Each subsequent year, that same percentage is multiplied by the remaining balance to be depreciated. At some point, the value will be lower than the straight-line charge, at which point, the double declining method will be scrapped and straight line used for the remainder of the asset’s life (got all that?). An illustration may help.

In our straight-line example, we calculated that a $5,000 computer with a $200 salvage value and an estimated useful life of three years would be depreciated by $1,600 annually. The first year, we have to compare this to the total amount to be depreciated, in this case, $4,800 ($5,000 base - $200 salvage value = $4,800). Dividing $1,600 by $4,800, we discover the straight-line depreciation charge of $1,600 is 33.33% of the total depreciation amount of $4,800. Using this information, we double the 33.33% figure to 66.67%.

In the first year, we would take $4,800 multiplied by .6667 to get a total depreciation charge of approximately $3,200. In the second year, we would take the same percentage (66.67%) and multiply it by the remaining amount to be depreciated. Continuing with the example, we find that $1,600 is the remaining amount to be depreciated at the start of the second year ($4,800 - $3,200 = $1,600). Multiply 1,600 by .6667 to get $1,066. This is the depreciation charge for the second year – or not! Remember that once the depreciation charges dip below the amount that would be charged using the straight-line method, the double declining balance is scrapped and straight line immediately utilized. The straight line method called for charges of $1,600 per year. Obviously, the $1,066 charge is smaller than the $1,600 that would have occurred under straight line. Thus, the deprecation charge for the second year would be $1,600.

For those of you who love algebra, you may find it easier to use this equation:

Sorry for your pain, man, but I'm super glad that the price dropped, cause I just purchased a 5D3 that was almost $1000 less than MSRP. I've been holding out for a deal like this for a long time. I'm sure it will go down in value later, but I'm gonna get my money's worth out of it. Which, I think, should be everybody's attitude, no matter what you paid for your equipment, get your money's worth out of it! It's like going to an all you can eat buffet. Pig out! Then go back for more.

My primary income is from investments. I really have no personal feelings when it comes to taking a loss on something. It's business.

LolLol

Then you should understand that when it comes to electronics such as digital cameras are not investments and that if you were a business owning them then you would be writing off a sizeable fraction of the capital cost each year due to this.

On the other hand, if you actually thought that digital cameras were worthy of being an investment and you do investments for other people as a profession then I'm hella glad that I'm not your client and have pity on those that are!

Personally I love what Canon brings to the market but their prices for new gear of late has been outrageous. I haven't been stung - I bought a 5dMK2 just as the 5D3 came out so actually I got a good deal. I wouldnt spend that much on a body - much rather have last year's body and a top lens.

My biggest concern is for people who bought the 5D3 thinking it was the replacement for the 5D2, so they bought it and then Canon announce the 6D. I thought that was borderline misleading the customer, particularly as the 5D3 was significantly more expensive but carried the 5D lineage.

Also the 6D has built in wifi and GPS - that's got to be a kick in the balls for some 5D3 owners.

Make no mistake - Canon is charging its customers for the lost revenue caused by the 2011 tsunami.

I don't like it and I don't love Canon like I might but the next best option is Nikon and their lens range is crap in comparrison to Canon's.

Personally I love what Canon brings to the market but their prices for new gear of late has been outrageous. I haven't been stung - I bought a 5dMK2 just as the 5D3 came out so actually I got a good deal. I wouldnt spend that much on a body - much rather have last year's body and a top lens.

My biggest concern is for people who bought the 5D3 thinking it was the replacement for the 5D2, so they bought it and then Canon announce the 6D. I thought that was borderline misleading the customer, particularly as the 5D3 was significantly more expensive but carried the 5D lineage.

Also the 6D has built in wifi and GPS - that's got to be a kick in the balls for some 5D3 owners.

Make no mistake - Canon is charging its customers for the lost revenue caused by the 2011 tsunami.

I don't like it and I don't love Canon like I might but the next best option is Nikon and their lens range is crap in comparrison to Canon's.

err, the 5D III DID replace the 5D II, if you note the price on release, both were about the same (counting inflation/currency variation over time) - it was pretty much what every 5D II user wanted the camera to be. 6D is a new line entirely, aimed at the more budget conscious, without the build quality and "pro" features expected of a 5 series. Just because the price of the 6D on release is closer to the 5D II at the end of its life doesn't make it a replacement...